We will now have world peace since you sorted that out.

As long as someone else is *paying*. That is where most of the argument really goes. Whos fault hence whos paying.

If the machines where given a similar mass budget to human crews. Sure they could.

Right now the machines we send and tiny fractions of the mass budget (and cash budget) that people compare to manned missions. And yet the machines still get more done.

I got a better plan. Build green houses with lights. Much easier than moving humanity around. Seriously sci fi misses the most obvious stuff.

Err no they are not. First of all the all violate energy principals widely accepted to hold. Second they need *negative mass* that has *zero* theoretical underpinnings. That is, withing the currently accepted physical theories they are quite impossible. Then add the fact that the basic Alcubierre drive needs more energy than the visible universe and is causally disconnected from the rest of the universe....

We find maths that describes reality, not the other way round. A good example is how high will a ball go when thrown upwards at a given speed. One of the solutions can give a complex number. We just ignore it as physically impossible.

Just because the math has a solution in some abstract mathematical sense does not mean is represents anything to do with reality.

The thing that is not plausible, is that relocating a substantial part of humanity off planet is easier than building a lot of green houses with hydroponics or areo poinics.. or just plane old green houses.

That is a fairly easy undergrad problem. It is very easy to show thermodynamics, conversation of energy, conservation of momentum and everything else is *not* violated in *all* frames of reference.

Gravity waves travel at the speed of light. Not faster. Quantum entanglement does not affect anything. It is a mathematical construct to derive the outcomes of measurements. It has been proven many many times that no information or anything else for that matter is "transmitted", let alone faster than light.

Current evidence is not "slightly suggest", it is more like very nearly certainly impossible.

Of course machines could have done all that as well. And cheaper too. And if you did get unlucky and killed a few "best of the best" robots. It won't be a media disaster.

What the fuck is wrong with you people. Half the species have/will go extinct but it has *nothing* to do with oil.

It is farming and fishing.

Yea like anyone wants to discussion anything with an fucking gramma Nazi.

What Greenpeace opposes would fill a warehouse. Does any sane person listen to them anymore.

Turns out that this is not the case. On the order of 90 seconds total vacuum should not kill you if you get recompressed. Our skin is not just for looks, but provides significant protection. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...

Yes it is. Unless it is sticking into a bacterial vector, it is hard. Hell in in vectors getting everything right so that *anything* works at all is hard. For more complex organisms, its just either does nothing (silenced DNA) or kills the plant. Getting promoters and everything right is far from simple or straight forward.